• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Tennis

Page 110 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 25, 2009
6,983
0
0
sniper said:
python said:
this has nothing to do with politics or geopolitics but a geography.

only the eastern europeans used the drug and only them got caught so far, including the 2 ukrainian biathletes. a half a dozen to-date, iirc.

she like them got sloppy and now needs to face up. as i wrote in a xc ski thread, they got snatched in droves, b/c wada (but likely not the sport or a nat. fed) knew all along they were the users of the watch list drug.

once this mildronate entered the banned list in january 2016, it was a simple matter of developing a target list from a list of known names and methodically 'execute' them one-by-one. if wada really wants it, they can arrange the sudden ooc test in a way that ANY sports federation, even if they tried to cover it up, wont be able to. wada learned it lessons from clashes with some 'protectionist' federations like cycling

old habits die hard...they continued to use it in part due to typical human stupidity/complacency and in part due to a calcalution they wont get caught b/c the drug has a short half-life. this is essentially the same avoidance tactic used since forever to beat some steroid, growth hormone and other tests...

i don't think it was the only dope she used at one or another period of her career.
could nike be involved behind the scenes? some kind of contractual conflict with Maria?
I find it suspect how quickly they jump ship, when meanwhile they're still sponsoring gatlin for instance.

and why would wada 'really want' this?
sure, she's russian, but this is basically an american positive.
its not an american positive.

we dont know yet the full circumstances around the failed test. the test managing authority for all intents and purposes is the international tennis fed. i mentioned wada not b/c i think they DID nail sharapova, but b/c they have the opportunity to do so. specifically, as i already wrote, to remain in apolitically preferential position should a federation - any federation in any sport like the uci did with armstrong - try to cover up the positive.

her sponsorship troubles or the nike double standard were not my my points.
 
sniper said:
python said:
...
once this mildronate entered the banned list in january 2016, it was a simple matter of developing a target list from a list of known names and methodically 'execute' them one-by-one. if wada really wants it, they can arrange the sudden ooc test in a way that ANY sports federation, even if they tried to cover it up, wont be able to. wada learned it lessons from clashes with some 'protectionist' federations like cycling
could nike be involved behind the scenes? some kind of contractual conflict with Maria?
I find it suspect how quickly they jump ship, when meanwhile they're still sponsoring gatlin for instance.

I agree wada can make this happen if they want. But why would wada 'really want' this?
Sure, she's russian, but this is basically an american positive.

Or is there a deeper Wada vs. Nike issue, with a damning Oregon report glooming in the background?
(clutching at straws, i know)
I guess that Nike already felt they hadn't been getting bang for their buck due to her series of injuries and this provided an opportunity to get out of an expensive no longer productive contract early.
 
May 14, 2010
4,833
2
0
Merckx index said:
Maxiton said:
I wonder how many other players on the tennis circuit were taking this drug. Since the authorities have a list, ostensibly, of every drug taken by the players, they would be aware that she's been taking the drug for ten years. If they then suddenly ban the drug, what efforts did they make to get the word to their athlete? And if the drug's sole purpose is performance enhancement, why wait for ten years to ban it?
She was sent an email notifying her that the drug was banned, but says she didn't read it. The drug was on WADA's watch list in 2015, if not sooner, so if she'd been following things at all, she certainly would have realized that she needed to check before continuing to use it in 2016.
With that much money and juice at stake, it seems difficult to believe that she or someone on her team wouldn't open such emails and read them. It also seems really difficult to believe that WADA or ITF would leave it to an email, for god's sake.

I mean, you have it on record that this athlete has been using this drug. She has been submitting this info to you for ten years. You decide to prohibit the drug. How do you notify this athlete? By sending an email? I should think a meeting would be needed, or at least a phone call.

If there was a meeting or a phone call, and she was still found positive, then that's her tough luck. But if it was only an email, then somebody at WADA or ITF is negligent, and Sharapova should suffer no sanction.
 
Sep 25, 2009
6,983
0
0
sorry, max, for brevity i only quote and address one point
But if it was only an email, then somebody at WADA or ITF is negligent, and Sharapova should suffer no sanction
the wada rules may have changed, but the last time i read the rule book (apr 2 yo) a testing authority, the itf in this case i guess, is under NO obligation to alert any individual athlete of a banned (new or existing) nature of a drug.

the draft of the the particular year banned list is typically floated sometime in the fall and then it becomes mandatory for ALL (rhyming not intended).

this is not to exclude that there are warnings or communications for various situations... like a change in the status (say a rejection) of a therapeutic use exemption or a warning due to an athletes blood off-score getting close to tripping value (133).

if there was an email about meldronate specifically that sharapova claims to have failed to read, it was likely a global correspondence to ALL testing pool athletes - a reminder of the 2016 banned list changes.

she is cute but even the blonde cuties can spin .
 
Jun 4, 2015
285
0
0
sniper said:
python said:
...
once this mildronate entered the banned list in january 2016, it was a simple matter of developing a target list from a list of known names and methodically 'execute' them one-by-one. if wada really wants it, they can arrange the sudden ooc test in a way that ANY sports federation, even if they tried to cover it up, wont be able to. wada learned it lessons from clashes with some 'protectionist' federations like cycling
could nike be involved behind the scenes? some kind of contractual conflict with Maria?
I find it suspect how quickly they jump ship, when meanwhile they're still sponsoring gatlin for instance.

I agree wada can make this happen if they want. But why would wada 'really want' this?
Sure, she's russian, but this is basically an american positive.

Or is there a deeper Wada vs. Nike issue, with a damning Oregon report glooming in the background?
(clutching at straws, i know)

Nothing wrong with clutching at straws in this game, no theory is too 'left-field' for the shenanigans of pro sport. How many times have things finally come out in the wash and people say 'you couldn't make it up'.
 
Jun 4, 2015
285
0
0
Poor old Sharapova, if only she had the pluck and courage of the Brits to tap into. Have the BBC gone into damage limitation mode yet? I know Sharapova is one of those pesky Ruskies, but this could affect peoples' perception of that fine British institution, Wimbledon.
 
Re:

The Carrot said:
Poor old Sharapova, if only she had the pluck and courage of the Brits to tap into. Have the BBC gone into damage limitation mode yet? I know Sharapova is one of those pesky Ruskies, but this could affect peoples' perception of that fine British institution, Wimbledon.
Why more so than the Australian Open, the USA one, or the French, which she won twice? Are the Aussies or the French rushing into damage limitation mode?
 
Feb 24, 2015
61
0
0
Re:

sniper said:
nike already dropped her?
arent they still sponsoring gatlin?
No point sponsoring someone who will get no TV coverage, well on court anyway...

Of course, Gatlin got a deal from Nike last spring, conveniently when he started to challenge Bolt's dominance and get some good airtime.
 
Mar 13, 2009
12,232
0
0
BullsFan22 said:
My money is that either it will be 6 months max or until they clear her, which very well could be in a few weeks, maybe sooner.

If she doesn't get cleared, and is suspended 6 months or more, then I think you might see some floodgates opening. Perhaps even without a suspension. I really hope a bunch of well known players go down or at least more people start seeing them as suspicious. If tennis and other professional sports want to get serious (highly doubt that) about doping and betting/fixing, they have to start taking everyone that's found to be involved, not just some psycho like Koellerer or a 'technicality' and "it was for a medical condition" Sharapova.
shane warne mom fluid tablet reduction
 
Re:

gooner said:
That's a highly misleading statement.

The former No. 1 said she had taken meldonium, a heart medicine which improves blood flow and is little-known in the U.S., for a decade following various health problems including regular sicknesses, early signs of diabetes and "irregular" results from echocardiography exams.

"I was first given the substance back in 2006. I had several health issues going on at the time," she said. Sharapova didn't specify whether she had used it constantly since then.
"Depending on the patient's health condition, treatment course of meldonium preparations may vary from four to six weeks. Treatment course can be repeated twice or thrice a year," the company said in an emailed statement. "Only physicians can follow and evaluate patient's health condition and state whether the patient should use meldonium for a longer period of time."
 
Mar 25, 2013
3,762
0
0
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
gooner said:
That's a highly misleading statement.

The former No. 1 said she had taken meldonium, a heart medicine which improves blood flow and is little-known in the U.S., for a decade following various health problems including regular sicknesses, early signs of diabetes and "irregular" results from echocardiography exams.

"I was first given the substance back in 2006. I had several health issues going on at the time," she said. Sharapova didn't specify whether she had used it constantly since then.
"Depending on the patient's health condition, treatment course of meldonium preparations may vary from four to six weeks. Treatment course can be repeated twice or thrice a year," the company said in an emailed statement. "Only physicians can follow and evaluate patient's health condition and state whether the patient should use meldonium for a longer period of time."
But the 4-6 weeks is still referring to normal situations. Yeah in more severe cases, it "can" be used for longer on medical supervision.

Yet Sharapova hasn't detailed any this.

Funny coincidence it's Russian athletes have a need for it long-term and Mutko expects many more. He even says they are using this for "recovery".
 
Re: Re:

gooner said:
King Boonen said:
gooner said:
That's a highly misleading statement.

The former No. 1 said she had taken meldonium, a heart medicine which improves blood flow and is little-known in the U.S., for a decade following various health problems including regular sicknesses, early signs of diabetes and "irregular" results from echocardiography exams.

"I was first given the substance back in 2006. I had several health issues going on at the time," she said. Sharapova didn't specify whether she had used it constantly since then.
"Depending on the patient's health condition, treatment course of meldonium preparations may vary from four to six weeks. Treatment course can be repeated twice or thrice a year," the company said in an emailed statement. "Only physicians can follow and evaluate patient's health condition and state whether the patient should use meldonium for a longer period of time."
But the 4-6 weeks is still referring to normal situations. Yeah in more severe cases, it "can" be used for longer on medical supervision.

Yet Sharapova hasn't detailed any this.

Funny coincidence it's Russian athletes have a need for it long-term and Mutko expects many more. He even says they are using this for "recovery".
Why should she share her medical details in a press conference? Why did you omit the part, directly after the discussion on a normal treatment course, that states that repeat treatment could be required 2-3 times a year, clearly indicating that multiple treatments are not uncommon?

You posted the article and editorialised it with a single, highly misleading sentence. Did you read the article?
 
Oct 16, 2010
13,578
1
0
Re: Re:

Nellyspania said:
sniper said:
nike already dropped her?
arent they still sponsoring gatlin?
No point sponsoring someone who will get no TV coverage, well on court anyway...

Of course, Gatlin got a deal from Nike last spring, conveniently when he started to challenge Bolt's dominance and get some good airtime.
good point.
 
Jul 19, 2010
86
0
8,680
Re: Re:

wrinklyvet said:
The Carrot said:
Poor old Sharapova, if only she had the pluck and courage of the Brits to tap into. Have the BBC gone into damage limitation mode yet? I know Sharapova is one of those pesky Ruskies, but this could affect peoples' perception of that fine British institution, Wimbledon.
Why more so than the Australian Open, the USA one, or the French, which she won twice? Are the Aussies or the French rushing into damage limitation mode?
You need to understand how much the BBC push Wimbledon. It's the biggest event in their calendar.
 
Oct 16, 2010
13,578
1
0
still curious how this could happen. Hard to believe in coincidence, knowing that at least the entire top 100 perhaps 200 is doped to the eyebrows, men and women alike.
There must be a reason why Maria, and not some other, less prominent, Russian or Eastern European player got popped.
 
Jun 4, 2015
285
0
0
Re: Re:

LeakyBoat said:
wrinklyvet said:
The Carrot said:
Poor old Sharapova, if only she had the pluck and courage of the Brits to tap into. Have the BBC gone into damage limitation mode yet? I know Sharapova is one of those pesky Ruskies, but this could affect peoples' perception of that fine British institution, Wimbledon.
Why more so than the Australian Open, the USA one, or the French, which she won twice? Are the Aussies or the French rushing into damage limitation mode?
You need to understand how much the BBC push Wimbledon. It's the biggest event in their calendar.

And becoming even more pivotal to them in the light of the BBC not being able to compete with the likes of Sky etc and loosing sporting events. The BBC's coverage of the whole thing is pretentious, the most OTT thing I saw was slow motion replays of Andy Murray with angelic choir music in the background shown each time the players changed ends during the final.
 
Just wondering if any cyclist will be sweating about this test?

And, can anyone advise me, if a cyclist was taking it for performance enhancement in 2015, would that not also be liable for a ban?
 
coinneach said:
Just wondering if any cyclist will be sweating about this test?

And, can anyone advise me, if a cyclist was taking it for performance enhancement in 2015, would that not also be liable for a ban?
Eduard Vorganov of Katusha has already tested positive so I think it's highly likely others will be worried.

To the bold no, in 2015 it was only being monitored and anyone could take it.
 
Re:

sniper said:
still curious how this could happen. Hard to believe in coincidence, knowing that at least the entire top 100 perhaps 200 is doped to the eyebrows, men and women alike.
There must be a reason why Maria, and not some other, less prominent, Russian or Eastern European player got popped.
I don't know. The cynic in me has always agreed that dope tests are no less than IQ tests. If you do it cleverly you will not be caught either way. This however is very easy to detect and the list of athletes caught is growing rapidly (see my post above) and not only Russians (also a Ukranian athlete and a Swedish Ethiopian athlete). It is just that this seems to be ridiculously easy to detect.
 
Jun 4, 2015
285
0
0
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2016/03/08/why-maria-sharapova-does-not-deserve-sympathy/

Some good points here, I like this bit ": So Sharapova’s camp are telling us that as an 18-year-old prodigy she was cursed with abnormal heart readings, low magnesium, immune deficiencies and diabetes indicators, yet still emerged to be a five-time Grand Slam champion and the world’s richest woman athlete. Some achievement, with a body so widely compromised."

Athletes are an afflicted lot aren't they? :rolleyes:
 
If she has medical records to support that she has been taking this for 10 years, shouldn't she be grandmothered in? Even if she didn't "need" it, her body might not know how to function correctly without it now.

EDIT: I'm being both serious and tongue-in-cheek.
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
Re:

jmdirt said:
If she has medical records to support that she has been taking this for 10 years, shouldn't she be grandmothered in? Even if she didn't "need" it, her body might not know how to function correctly without it now.
no doubt she will have back dated medical records being done at this minute ;)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS